The U.S. Department of Justice has rejected Texas' application for
preclearance of its voter ID law, saying the state did not prove that
the bill would not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters.

"The
department's letter states that Texas did not meet its burden under
Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of showing that the law will not have
a discriminatory effect on minority voters, and therefore the
department objects to the Texas voter identification law," said Xochitl
Hinojosa, a Justice Department spokeswoman. "According to the state's
own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5%, and potentially
120%, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack the
required identification."

Assistant U.S. Attorney General Thomas E. Perez wrote in a letter to Keith Ingram, the director of Texas' elections division on Monday:

As
noted above, an applicant for an election identification certificate
will have to travel to a driver's license office. This raises three
discrete issues. First, according to the most recent American Community
Survey three-year estimates, 7.3 percent of Hispanic or Latino
households do not have an available vehicle, as compared with only 3.8
percent of non-Hispanic white households that lack an available vehicle.
Statistically significant correlations exist between the Hispanic
voting-age population percentage of a county, and the percentage of
occupied housing units without a vehicle.

Second, in 81
of the state's 254 counties, there are no operational driver's license
offices. The disparity in the rates between Hispanics and non-Hispanics
with regard to the possession of either a driver's license or personal
identification card issued by DPS is particularly stark in counties
without driver's license offices. According to the September 2011 data,
10.0 percent of Hispanics in counties without driver's license offices
do not have either form of identification, compared to 5.5 percent of
non-Hispanics. According to the January 2012 data, that comparison is
14.6 percent of Hispanics in counties without driver's license offices,
as compared to 8.8 percent of non-Hispanics. During the legislative
hearings, one senator stated that some voters in his district could have
to travel up to 176 miles roundtrip in order to reach a driver's
license office. The legislature tabled amendments that would have, for
example, provided reimbursement to voters who live below the poverty
line for travel expenses incurred in applying for the requisite
identification.

The bill, Senate Bill 14 by Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, was one of Gov. Rick Perry's
"emergency items" during the 82nd Legislature and requires voters to
present a state-issued photo ID, such as a driver's license, military
ID, U.S. passport or concealed handgun license before casting a ballot.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott,
who expected the federal government's rejection, said late last week he
plans to forge ahead with the lawsuit he filed last month to have the
bill implemented immediately. The Justice Department has until April 9
to respond to the lawsuit.

Abbott has cited the department's
rejections of recently passed laws similar to Texas' voter ID law, not
to mention that less-than-subtle warning from U.S. Attorney General Eric
Holder, who said in Austin in December that the department would place
Texas' law under a microscope.

"It [the request] was submitted to
them in July, and they kept delaying and delaying and delaying," Abbot
said on Thursday. "We saw them reject a similar proposal in South
Carolina and we couldn't see them rejecting South Carolina and approving
Texas."

The voter ID law "would have trampled on the
constitutional right to cast a ballot for hundreds of thousands of
Texans, said Texas Democratic Party spokeswoman Rebecca Acuña, praising
the Justice Department's ruling. "Republicans have wasted enough
taxpayer dollars defending this voter suppression legislation."

Below is a timeline of actions and decisions over the past year affecting Texas' voter ID law:

March 23, 2011:
SB 14 passes the Texas House of Representatives following debate on
more than 60 amendments and seven points of order. The House discussed
the bill for about 12 hours.

May 9, 2011:
The Texas Senate adopts the voter ID conference committee report, which
tweaked some of the amendments approved during the House floor debate.

May 16, 2011:
The Texas House approves the committee's report, which removed a
provision that would have allowed residences of federally recognized
tribal lands to show their tribal IDs to vote. The bill's House sponsor,
Patricia Harless,
R-Spring, also introduced an "outside the bounds resolution" that
included in the bill a provision where free IDs would be made available
for the sole purpose of casting a ballot. A provision to exclude people
who attest under oath they do not have their photos takes due to
religious purposes was also adopted.

July 2011: The
Texas Secretary of State's office submits to the U.S. Department of
Justice the required request for preclearance. Because of Texas' history
of racial discrimination, section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act
gives the U.S. Department of Justice or the federal courts the authority
to review laws that would affect voter participation. Fifteen other
states are subject to the preclearance rule.

August 2011:
The National Conference of State Legislators issues a report explaining
the differences in Texas' law compared to others recently passed. The
report concludes that:

Only six other states, like Texas, have a
strict photo requirement: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Wisconsin, South
Carolina and Tennessee. Seven states — Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho,
Louisiana, Michigan and South Dakota — ask voters for photo ID, but
still allow them to cast a ballot if they don't have a photo ID and can
meet other specific criteria. Sixteen other states require voters to
show some form of ID, though not necessarily with a photo.

September 2011:
Arguing the bill unfairly affects minorities and the elderly, a
coalition of civil and rights groups writes the Department of Justice
urging denial of the preclearance request. In a letter submitted during
the public comment period by the Advancement Project, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Asian American Justice Center and the Southwest Workers Union,
the groups alleged that instead of actually providing proof the
legislation was enacted for non-discriminatory reasons, the state relied
simply on its claim that officials did not intend on diluting the
voting strength of minority groups.

Gov. Perry's office responds,
saying that: "Voter ID was enacted to ensure the integrity of the ballot
box, protecting the most cherished right we enjoy as citizens and
ensuring our elections are fair beyond reproach. By applying to voting
the same standard that is commonly applied in cashing a check or
applying for a library card, Voter ID can ensure an accurate reflection
of the will of the voters."

September 23, 2011
The DOJ tells the Texas Secretary of State's office that it needs more
information to render a decision on whether SB 14 will "have neither the
purpose nor will have the effect of denying or abridging the right to
vote on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority
group."

Specifically, it wants to know details about the estimated
605,600 registered voters who do not currently possess a valid ID. The
department asked the state to identify how many members of that group
have Spanish surnames, which counties they reside in and an estimated
number by race. The DOJ also requested that the state provide the number
of registered voters in Texas with a Spanish surname who currently
possess a legal form of identification.

October 5, 2011:
The state responds and says it does not ask about voters' race when
they register. Instead, the Texas Secretary of State submitted a list of
all the Hispanic surnames in Texas, according to the U.S. Census
Bureau. The state also offered to run that list against the list of
registered voters to determine how many have Hispanic names, and it
offered to use data from the Texas Department of Public Safety, which
issues driver's licenses, to assist in obtaining the information.

November 17, 2011:
The department still isn't satisfied and tells the state it wants more
information. The state responds but tells the Tribune: "the state
warned that the results would be skewed because DPS didn't include a
specific category for Hispanic drivers until 2009."

December 13, 2011:
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holders tells an audience at the LBJ Library
at the University of Texas at Austin that the federal government will
fight tooth and nail to ensure minority-voting rights is not eroded by
actions of state legislatures. He says the Texas bill will undergo a
fair and thorough review.

December 2011:
The American Civil Liberties Union files a suit in federal court
challenging the state of Wisconsin's voter ID law. ACLU attorneys allege
that bill is less strict that the Texas proposal but will also
disenfranchise minority and elderly voters. Nonetheless, a decision on
the Wisconsin bill could be used as a guide to determine what other
states can and cannot do.

"This lawsuit is the opening act in what
will be a long struggle to undo the damage done to the right to vote by
strict photo ID laws and other voter suppression measures," Jon
Sherman, an attorney with the ACLU Voting Rights Project, said in a
statement. "Across the nation, legislators are robbing countless
American citizens of their fundamental right to vote, and in the
process, undermining the very legitimacy of our democracy.

December 23, 2011: The Department of Justice issues a ruling rejecting South Carolina's voter ID law.

January 13, 2011:
The state of Texas resubmits its request for preclearance, and the
Department of Justice has 60 says from this state to make a decision.
Again, the state warns about the reliability of the data.

"By
requesting Spanish surname data, the DOJ's request acknowledges that the
DPS database does not accurately reflect the number of Hispanic voters
in Texas who possess a driver's license or photo identification card,"
Keith Ingram, the director of the state's elections division wrote to
the department.

"Nonetheless, in a good faith attempt to satisfy
the DOJ's request, the State has compiled the requested data - despite
the State's reservations about the reliability of that data."

"The
U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that voter identification laws are
constitutional," Texas Attorney Abbott said in a prepared statement.
"Texas should be allowed the same authority other states have to protect
the integrity of elections. To fast-track that authority, Texas is
taking legal action in a D.C. court seeking approval of its voter
identification law."

Abbott says his office will drop the suit if preclearance is granted.

March 7, 2012:
The Texas Secretary of State tell the Tribune the state will be ready
to have the required outreach and voter-education requirements in place
by the May 29 primary if the preclearance request is granted.

Tucson weather

Clouds:Clear skies

Temp:86°F

Humidity:12%

Wind:Varies at 5 mph

Yes!

I want to help TucsonSentinel.com offer a real news alternative!

We're committed to making quality news accessible; we'll never set up a paywall or charge for our site. But we rely on your support to bring you indepedent news without the spin. Use our convenient PayPal/credit card donation form below or contact us at donate@tucsonsentinel.com today.